As they say in politics, timing is everything, and the shock resignation of David Petraeus as CIA director raises serious questions about whether this was genuinely a resignation caused by his affair with his biographer, or whether it was a hatchet job by Barack Obama's administration to prevent him giving evidence this Thursday to the Senate Intelligence Committee.

The general's friends tell me that his sudden departure from Langley has nevertheless raised suspicions that his political enemies in the Obama administration  and there are many  used his dalliance to force him out of the CIA before he could make damaging allegations about the handling of the al-Qaeda attack on the US Consulate in Benghazi last September, in which US Ambassador Chris Stephens and three other staff died.

Gen Petraeus is a political animal  it was even rumoured that he might run for the Republican presidential nomination in 2016. The Obama crowd certainly saw him in those terms, which is why he was shunted off to the CIA in the first place, rather than being allowed to achieve his long-cherished ambition of becoming head of America's armed forces.

If Gen Petraeus harboured any thoughts of revenge, then Thursday's session of the Senate Intelligence Committee's investigation into the Benghazi killings offered him the perfect platform.

As CIA Director, Gen Petraeus would have all the details of who was responsible for this glaring security breach, and there were many senior members of the Obama administration who had good reason to silence him so they could save their own skins.

of course, I wouldn’t pass on the possibility of a setup by operators in retaliation for not supporting the guys in the field... if he was the one calling the shots (which does not seem to be the case)

5
posted on 11/12/2012 6:30:33 PM PST
by sten
(fighting tyranny never goes out of style)

So why isn’t he demanding to be heard? Why isn’t he being called to testify rather than putting out a statement that he needs time to put his life back together before he can say anything? Why are the Republicans and the Democrats being so understanding of his personal situation rather than the state of the USA? It all stinks.

IMO, I think he has been purposely kept there for just such a time as this. The O administration has got irons in the fire all over the world, it was only a matter of time before they got burned. I believe they knew all along he would make an excellent “fall guy/scapegoat”.

I pray to GOD that the truth comes out and O is brought to justice.

Another thing I want to come out is how the black population in Libya are being slaughtered....NOT A SINGLE WORD ABOUT IT. YAHOO/GOOGLE “black population in Libya are being slaughtered”

Very dirty business. Valerie Jarrett may have ordered the stand-down. Worse than Watergate, Americans were killed. Sad, but if this came up during a Republican Administration we would see so much information.

16
posted on 11/12/2012 6:43:31 PM PST
by seraphim
(Going Galt is the only way now.)

Don’t forget the Secret Service guys who were involved in with the Colombian prostitutes. Obama can surround himself with that element of the Secret Service...they would want to have someone like him in charge.

As CIA Director, Gen Petraeus would have all the details of who was responsible for this glaring security breach, and there were many senior members of the Obama administration who had good reason to silence him so they could save their own skins.

I think that the people who wanted him out of the CIA made an error. Gen Petraeus will be able to impeach whatever the CIA says without revealing much detail.

Can I ask a stupid question? Just because he had the affair and resigned, how does create a situation in which he will not have to testify? He was CIA director during these events and has a story to tell. Just because his personal life has troubles, somehow that gives an excuse to not testify? What am I missing?????

He is buying time to allow the Obama group to give their accounts of Benghazi. He will then testify with documentation as to what and who of benghazi. The documentation I am referring to is what the FBI is frantically looking for as we speak. This night raid is desperation because of the hearings this week.

Sounds like DiFi is going off the reservation on the Senate side. Get out the popcorn, it's time to see if Harry Reid has what it takes to steamroll the Den Mother of the Castro.

God will grant us that powerful Democrats fall out, and accidentally knock their inbox and outbox contents all over the floor.

Wonder if she's secretly pissed about Kam Kamata? He was her guy, remember -- and a potential Arkancide from a couple of years ago. "Heart attack", no witnesses, don't you know. His corpse lay in his apartment kitchen for days, weeks ...... right after he said he saw something at the Denver Immaculation in 2008.

He will. But not before the Secy of State. Her Heinous was hoping Petraeus would go first so she could fashion her story afterwards. Thus, she said she couldn't testify; her excuse is she has some globe-trotting to do.

Good thinking!

40
posted on 11/12/2012 10:33:29 PM PST
by TigersEye
(Who is John Galt?)

He can still be compelled to testify, but he won't be testifying right now because he's no longer holding the position of CIA director. When he was called to testify before, he wasn't called "personally" but was called as "the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency." Since he no longer holds that position, his replacement as the CIA director will testify instead.

However, there is absolutely nothing that prevents Congress from calling him anyway. They can basically call "David Petraeus" to testify as a private citizen, and he will have to do just that.

Ironically, as CIA director the Obama administration would have had a lot of leverage over him that it no longer has right now.

I think the conversation goes something like If you want to ever see your full military pension again then you will play ball with Chicago....Big deal. ONE book of all he knows and he has a lot more than a paltry Army pension, even if he was a general officer.

I think you guys have gotten a bit overwhelmed by this entire mess. What you should get out of this...thanks to the Broadwell tramp...is that the CIA was running an interrogation center there at Benghazi. They had two prisoners of some significance. This would explain why they had so many CIA guys in one location.

One might now start to connect the dots and realize that the bad guys who showed up that night were really looking to rescue their two buddies....who they felt were there at the ambassador’s house. They guessed wrong. The ambassador ended up dead. Kinda like a bungled SWAT raid on the wrong address...which occurs weekly in America.

The President would hate to admit that they still run interrogation centers in faraway lands....which was one of those 100 bad things that GW did and Senator Obama routinely criticized.

BINGO!!! Obama has attacked and compromised the Catholic Church, really ALL Churches who don't believe in paying for abortions, our DEBT has compromised our country, and the last vestige of decency was the MILITARY, and now with Patraeus and Allen and Ham and whoever else, along with OPEN GAYS, the military is being ruined.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.